We'll never run out, instead of sharing we sell it
Its called greed, not capitalism, greed. Capitalism works when you have a limited supply of something and need a way to decide who gets what, when everyone can have everything, whats the point of capitalism? Greed & Selfishness
You send them back they are entered into a seperate universe which has no effect on you they are literally sent back and by them exsistingn in the past they alter the new timeline thus creating a branch and a new universe NOT altering yours
math already allows this, its been done
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 2
Its not stored in a diffrent universe, math is not a storage medium, its a way of sorting information, you can put the information in 2d, 3d, 4d, 5d or whatever you can figure out mathematically.
We do have 4d, 5d + math, and there are people who claim to have weird maths.
zeosync for example, also take into account that you can store information essentially in 2d binary, 3d xyx coords, or 4d,
A good idea but it would take a mathematician to answer it. I do believe we will be able to create information which moves faster than light, which can be stored in 3d and even 4d space, storing information in 3d space = holographic storage which is the best we have, 4d space is debateable, somem say 4d is space itself, meaning all of this space we are contained in, is 4d, such as a 3d plane, and when we travel through space we are traveling through this 4d plane.
Re:He does not understand his own theories.
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 2
Thats why his experiment may not work.
He believes there arent any mirror universes, if they were then his particles would just disapear
Time travel creates NEW universes, i never said it travels through old ones. When you time travel you create a NEW fork, a universe where time travel is possible
Re:You'll Explain Wrong :(
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 2
The past is changed because of you!
you come from the past into the future your memory of the future modifies the past, you can never return to the same past.
what about infinate do you not understand?
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 2
There is no number, there are infinate universes.. which means theres infinate time travelers, does this mean they come to our universe or create a new one when they time travel?
First, how do we know people dont come fromm other universes? Its not like you'd believe it if some guy said he saw a ghost, or some flying saucer, or anything of the sort. You just dont know.
There could be others here from other universes, and time travels but you see, we wouldnt know what the hell they are, we'd call them ghosts, aliens, angels, demons, gods, if we saw them in the past
"Bill:I dont see how Linux can ever be successful, its FREE!"
"Steve: Yes I know its free, they assume every programmer will contribute their time and code! Why would anyone contribute to something which cant make then any moneY?!"
"Bill: Lets not worry about linux, it has no chance, how about we focus on destroying apple."
No, it wasn't set to "domonate." Even after Sega more than halved the DC's initial price, sales continued to slow down. Also, do you realize how inconsistent your claims are? First you claim Sega shouldn't have launched the DC. Then you claim they shouldn't have killed it, since it was poised to take over the world, according to you.
I said Okawa said they shouldnt have launched it and they shouldnt, no matter how well DC could have sold, unless each DC owner were to purchase 10 games, Sega would not be able to get out of debt, then after out of debt they'd have to sell even more games to make a profit, DC had no business being launched by a company in debt
You are one of the most blinded fanboys I've ever seen. Sony didn't bribe anybody. It's just that everyone could see that the PS2 was going to sell faster. And they were right - worldwide PS2 sales were about 8 million for Jan.-March 2002.
Ok, Microsoft is an honest company too, so is AOL, these commpanies never use their money to bribe anyone, they never abuse their power.
Come back to reality man. These are big companies, do you honestly think they dont bribe people?
Except that Nintendo was still the most profitable video game company in the world during the N64 years. Whereas Sega experienced losses for three years straight.
Exactly, Nintendo knows how to run a business, Sega doesnt. Sega only knows how to lose money.
I'm not sure what you mean by these numbers, but every one of these consoles eventually sold far more than those amounts.
Eventually? My point was DC was the fastest selling consolee ever, I admit DC sales slowed during the end of the second year, this is when third parties dropped Sega and were dissing Sega at every chance they got, magazines and third parties which i believe had to be bribed, were claiming DC would fail for no real reason considering these third parties were selling sometimes millions of copies of their games.
Its simple, Sony is a bigger company, its not hard to understand, bigger companies influence magazines and third parties, through bribes, stock, politics, also remember, smaller companies like partnerships with bigger companies, such as squaresoft.
Last most third parties and even the magazines KNEW Sega didnt know a damn thing about business and thats the main reason why none of them had any faith in Sega.
Well it was the middle of the night and i was tired lets go over what you just said.
You are wrong in every instance, except about the Saturn. All of these consoles have had 2-year runs with over 10 million sales, although not in every case was it the first 10 years.
Launch 1994 This is from a PSX biased site,
PlayStation launched in Europe; within six weeks the UK installed base had risen to 50 000. Around 350 000 units were in customer's homes across Europe by Christmas 1995. Price £299.
350,000 compared to Dreamcasts 5 million. Big diffrence.
May 1995
Japanese sales exceed 1 million units of hardware.
1 million the first year. Pathetic compared to dreamcasts 5 million.
January 1996
34 PlayStation titles have now been launched in Europe, 18 of them by third party licensees
Global sales of PlayStation hit 3.4 million units with 518 000 of those units sold through in Europe
3.4 million in Jan of 96.
3.4 million systems sold in the first year, commpare to dreamcasts 5 million.
August 1996
PlayStation game consoles cumulative production and shipment as at August 1996 reached 7.2 million units worldwide.
Japan 3.5 million
7.2 million units sold
PSX is selling good, but DC still had a faster start. DC was at 9 million systems when Sega killed it, and sold a million more soon later, reaching somewhere around 10 million systems.
The PSX reached 10 million systems
PlayStation Worldwide Shipments Hit 9 million units
during xmas 1996
IT launched in 94, so PSX and DC were at the same level, DC was set to domonate, lets not forget xmas of 96 is the same year the N64 launched, PSX2 wasnt supposed to launch for another year when DC was killed of, Sega had the fastest selling system ever, the sales of PSX and DC leveled out after the first 2 years, PSX went on to sell about 12 million systems in feb 97, DC could have easily been successful with this many systems sold, Sega killed DC because Sega either didnt have a business plan and over produced (I really doubt Sega would over produce DC with all the PS2 hype) or Sega didnt have enough money,
I'm thinking Sega didnt have enough money, Sony got away with over producing the PSX, and they took a loss for a long time, but this is Sony.
Sony was taking a HUGE loss on PS2, once again this is Sony we are talking about.
See, this is why I called you hysterical earlier. AM2 did not spend a billion dollars on Shenmue. I've heard it was $70 million, which is still far too much, but you are off by an order of magnitude. Also, Okawa did not "break up the third parties," he split off Sega's development studios, which were first parties.
not hysterical, tired. It was late at night. The first parties were broken up, AM2 spent too much money on their games, period, and their games werent proven games like VF4 and Daytona. In the arcade industry AM2 could make their money back easily, this isnt true for the console industry. AM2s lack of business sense, and Segas lack of authority caused them to lose hundreds of millions from AM2s Shenmues.
Perhaps it's just sloppy wording on your part, but if you mean to say Sega didn't charge licensing fees, you're wrong. Part of the reason licensing revenues were relatively low was that developers kept jumping ship because they saw Dreamcast console sales were below expectations. 2000 and particularly 2001 was just a series of one cancelled game after another - adding insult to injury, some of these cancelled releases were Sega games. Anyway, this phenomenon explains why lower sales had a tendency to hurt Sega's finances, not help them. I still can't believe you hold the absurd position that lower hardware sales would have helped them.
Sega lost their third parties, mostly due to Sonys bribing, and Sega was in the situation Nintendo was in with N64, Sega however made too many games and wasted all their money, Sega could have had a successful system with DC easily if they didnt spend all their money up.
Thats my point, hardware sales being higher or lower wouldnt matter much, most of the money was lost on software development, low game sales, seganet, I mean having 10 million DC users is enough to make money, N64 made money with 10 million, PSX made money with 10 million, Genesis made money with 16 million.
Sega does not make MONEY for selling the DC, so Sega saying poor DC sales is their cause for failure sounds better to stockholders than Sega saying lack of a business plan is their cause for failure.
10 million DCs in 2 years? Come on, thats better than N64, better than PSX, better than Saturn, better than Genesis, better than SNES and better than NES sales, basically no system ever sold faster than DC at that point in time
The poor sales would have HELPED keep Sega alive due to Sega not losing so much money on system sales.
Tell me how Sega could lose more money by selling LESS than they would be selling more,
Its their lack of game sales which caused them to lose money. Their DCs sold great the first year, and good the second, they had around 8-9 million systems, more than all 4 years of saturn sales, more than 3 years of PSX sales and more than 3 years of N64 sales, Sega did this in 2 years.
This is good, at this rate they would have sold 20 million systems by now. Sega however couldnt afford to make 20 million systems.
Money is the key issue, \\Mostly it is an unstructured series of vague or untrue claims ("When Sega launched DC they DIDNT have a business plan"). But there is a shadow of an argument in it. First you claim its failure was all Sony's fault. Then you point out that Sega has poor business sense. But then you blame its demise on the loss of Okawa, even though all he was doing was throwing good money after bad by largely continuing the pattern of mistakes, i.e., showing poor busienss sense. These three reasons can't all be true at the same time. Also, it doesn't help your arguments any that you can't seem to find the period key.//
Okawa was head of CSK, Okawa was dying of cancer, you cant blame him for poor business plan, he didnt even launch the DC. Okawa took over after he saw how much money Sega was losing, Okawa was also head of CSK Segas parent company and main shareholder.
Lack of business sense, Sony Monopoly and Hype, Lack of money after Okawa died.
Yes all 3 reasons, the DC shouldnt have even been launched, Sega was in debt when they launched it and had no way of even paying for the launch, Okawa stepped in because Sega was in debt and because of his pride, he saved Sega from going out of business when the DC first launched.
//Yes, much (most) of the PS2's early hype was terribly unjustified, and this had some role in hurting Dreamcast sales - but most of the blame rests squarely on Sega's shoulders. Their marketing was poor and they spent massive - even unprecedented - amounts of money on games that didn't sell very well. And they did exactly what so many gamers were betting they'd do: they abandoned their loyal customers yet again, just like they did with the 32X and the Saturn.\\
Exactly, Lack of business sense on Segas part, you dont make new innovative expensive games when you want massive sales, you do this after you are out of debt. Sega made games which didnt have proven track records, great games but unproven games. Their marketing was great, they sold 10 million systems in 2 years, thats better than any system before it, and you claim DC had bad marketing?
Sega abandoning their customers is due to Segas lack of business sense. You do not launch a product without a plan on how to make money on it.
Imagine Apple launching the imac series and then spending 2 billion dollars on OSX and selling OSX seperately.
Imagine Microsoft selling Windows in a store instead of packing it in.
Sega screwed up because Sega didnt know how to run a console business, I dont know who they fired after the success of the genesis, or perhaps that success was a complete fluke, but Sega was a very STUPID company in terms of business
You dont spend billions of dollars when you are in debt launching a system, Sega shouldnt have launched DC at all, they should have gotten themselves out of debt first. Imagine if you were chairman of Sega, you just stepped down after the success of the Genesis, and you allow a new guy to run the company, he launches 32x and Saturn and your company loses a billion dollars and your company goes into debt,
Now imagine this same guy decides to launch the DC while your company is STILL in debt and loses a billion more dollars. You are a billionare and you bail your company out, you fire the guy, but what can you do to save the company now? You can keep paying from out of your pocket until the company is making a profit as option number 1, option number 2, accept another half billion dollar loss and pull out entirely.
Oh and dont forget you need to launch Seganet.
Face it, Sega was fucked from before they launched DC, launching DC was Sega goingg out of business, but Sega was bailed out more than once by Okawa, Okawa eventually became too sick and died, the guy who destroyed Sega with the Saturn, 32x, and poor business practices took control again.
Why do i think Sega will go out of business now? not because their games suck, or even because their games are bad, but because the guys running Sega now that okawa is gone, have no business sense at all.
Okawa brought business sense back to Sega before he died, he broke up the third parties and made them all seperate companies so Sega itself couldnt go down because AM2 spent a billion dollars on Shenmue 3 which wont sell.
And Okawa had the idea to make a Sega PC graphics card, a PDA chip, and games for cellphones,
When Okawa died, all of Segas hardware plans died with him because it was HIS money that kept Sega alive on the hardware side of things.
Its really simple, businesses which dont make money fail no matter how good the product is, or how well it sells, Apple could sell a billion imacs, if they sell it at a loss, they lose money, its that simple.
Also lack of third party royalties kept Sega from making money on third party game sales, dont forget about that
God = the first time traveler?
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 2
Good question, conciousness would be the first time traveler.
You can imagine any possible future, or remember any possible past.
traveling faster than light doesnt mean much
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 2
Dark moves faster than light, meaning invisible pockets in space black holes, void, dark matter, gravity
Whats worse, he could become god
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 2
literally he could instantly know all that is, was and ever will be, and control the whole uniiverse.
Re:laws for time travellers? who cares?
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 2
Sure he could travel into the future, even the past, but from what we know about physics and what this so called scientist should know, 2 versions of the same matter cannot occupy the same space.
This means if he travels into the future he'll be slipped into a mirror universe, just like creating a fork.
From what i know, time is change, we control change, and we control the future to some extent, but we control things as a mass conciousness,
we can use our conciousness to predict future events and remember past events, and this allows us to have some control over the future.
Someone who time travels, is essentially cheating, they cant effect our past or our future, instead by time traveling they create a seperate path for them, which is a mirror of our universe.
So i believe anyone who time travels will never return, they will vanish out of our exsistance and enter into another.
No one or aliens from the future can ever come to this universe because there are INFINITE parrallel universes, time traveling just creates a new onee.
Basically, anything that can happen, is happening, anything imaginable, has happened and will happen, maybe not for a hundred trillion years in our universe, but eventually.
And in some universes its happening now.
What makes him think that he could get back?
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 2
Sure he could travel into the future, even the past, but from what we know about physics and what this so called scientist should know, 2 versions of the same matter cannot occupy the same space.
This means if he travels into the future he'll be slipped into a mirror universe, just like creating a fork.
From what i know, time is change, we control change, and we control the future to some extent, but we control things as a mass conciousness,
we can use our conciousness to predict future events and remember past events, and this allows us to have some control over the future.
Someone who time travels, is essentially cheating, they cant effect our past or our future, instead by time traveling they create a seperate path for them, which is a mirror of our universe.
So i believe anyone who time travels will never return, they will vanish out of our exsistance and enter into another.
Its no more a known fact than time travel
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Its a known fact based on super stringn theory, that there are other dimensions, up to 11 others, according to M theory, and string theory, and the newest theories in physics, Time travel if it is possible in terms of what we understand from physics, would create a fork in reality where the time traveler would go through the fork in the road and join the future, we'd continue on our own fork in the road and go to our future, this person who time traveled would simply be missing from our reality and placed into the other. It would be a transfer of matter from one reality to the next, like if you create a fork in a pipe and you send a ball through one of the forks, the ball can either split up and be in both forks at once (which i doubt) or the ball can go into one fork or the other.
If the ball goes in both forks at once then they'd be able to return back to our time and tell us what happened, if the ball leaves our reality, it can never return back.
Ill explain
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
When you go to the past, this is assuming time travel to the past is actually possible, it modifies the future, the future is no longer the same. You are now in a totally diffrent dimension, a diffrent reality, one which you created when you entered the time machine.
Time travel is something our minds do on a daily basis, you can imagine future events, sometimes you are right and sometimes you are wrong, traveling into the future allows you to travel into a POSSIBLE future, but no future is THE absolute future,
Time is not mapped, its dynamic, it works like this, everything that can happening, is happening if not in this reality in another.
Its more like sliders than likee the time machine movie, you travel through realities, or mirror universes, according to current theory, its believed theres infinite mirror worlds
A time machine actually isnt a time machine in that sense, its a machine which allows you to go into any reality you want, or create your own reality by modifying the past.
We all create our own reality anyway, the diffrence is with a time machine, YOU have an advantage, you can not only imagine a new reality but literally control the future by modifying the past.
Its like gambling but cheating.
A time machine allows you to essentially cheat.
The reason we dont see anyone coming from the future is, when you travel to the future, the past changes, you can never go back to the original past, if you do go back to the past its a new past thats a mirror of the original one.
I'm convinced anyone who will time travel into the future will never return, basically they'll vanish forever and all will vanish with them
Anyone who travels to the past will vanish forever from our reality
basically time travel is a one way trip.
you just dont get it
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 3, Redundant
If someone in this world time travels, they vanish FOREVER. They can never return to THIS reality,
You see, if they go to the past, it creates a new future, thus a new reality
If they go to the future, its the future but they cant return to the present after they get to the future because the present is no longer the same present, if they return, they'll return to a new present.
basically time travelers arent traveling in time, but traveling through diffrent realities, its more like sliders.
This is based on string theory, and the current ideas of dimensions, and understanding of the multiverse and physics
Slashdot Mirror
why do we need to sell an endless supply?
Its like selling air, water, etc
We'll never run out, instead of sharing we sell it
Its called greed, not capitalism, greed.
Capitalism works when you have a limited supply of something and need a way to decide who gets what, when everyone can have everything, whats the point of capitalism? Greed & Selfishness
OPEN TECHNOLOGY MOVEMENT
Please support it
The only way to fight back, is to get serious and forget these damn petitions.
http://www.thelinuxshow.com/otc.htm
The open technology movement.
Go to that site and donate, your donation will be used to help create a lobbying group to congress,
If you dont have money to donate, if you are on a campus, host a rally, make posters, find ways to raise money and then donate.
You send them back they are entered into a seperate universe which has no effect on you
they are literally sent back and by them exsistingn in the past they alter the new timeline thus creating a branch and a new universe NOT altering yours
Its not stored in a diffrent universe, math is not a storage medium, its a way of sorting information, you can put the information in 2d, 3d, 4d, 5d or whatever you can figure out mathematically.
We do have 4d, 5d + math, and there are people who claim to have weird maths.
zeosync for example, also take into account that you can store information essentially in 2d binary, 3d xyx coords, or 4d,
A good idea but it would take a mathematician to answer it. I do believe we will be able to create information which moves faster than light, which can be stored in 3d and even 4d space, storing information in 3d space = holographic storage which is the best we have, 4d space is debateable, somem say 4d is space itself, meaning all of this space we are contained in, is 4d, such as a 3d plane, and when we travel through space we are traveling through this 4d plane.
Thats why his experiment may not work.
He believes there arent any mirror universes, if they were then his particles would just disapear
we will see whos rigt.
Time travel creates NEW universes, i never said it travels through old ones. When you time travel you create a NEW fork, a universe where time travel is possible
The past is changed because of you!
you come from the past into the future
your memory of the future modifies the past, you can never return to the same past.
There is no number, there are infinate universes..
which means theres infinate time travelers, does this mean they come to our universe or create a new one when they time travel?
First, how do we know people dont come fromm other universes? Its not like you'd believe it if some guy said he saw a ghost, or some flying saucer, or anything of the sort. You just dont know.
There could be others here from other universes, and time travels but you see, we wouldnt know what the hell they are, we'd call them ghosts, aliens, angels, demons, gods, if we saw them in the past
And if we see them now we'd call them haoxes
When you buy the os, a DONATION is automatically given to IE.
When you join the microsoft clu er MSN, you also donate to IE!
"Bill:I dont see how Linux can ever be successful, its FREE!"
"Steve: Yes I know its free, they assume every programmer will contribute their time and code! Why would anyone contribute to something which cant make then any moneY?!"
"Bill: Lets not worry about linux, it has no chance, how about we focus on destroying apple."
Which makes millions of dollars so you can use AOL 7.0
You see, a service which asks the common man to pay, is a donation
A service which asks big companies to pay is business
Redhat is a business, Mandrake is a donation
wheres the logic they both do the same thing!
Mandrake Club, Up2date
But I dont, so why should i give my money to Suse? or Redhat?
Mandrake is for people who dont run a business, the working class OS.
No, it wasn't set to "domonate." Even after Sega more than halved the DC's initial price, sales continued to slow down. Also, do you realize how inconsistent your claims are? First you claim Sega shouldn't have launched the DC. Then you claim they shouldn't have killed it, since it was poised to take over the world, according to you.
I said Okawa said they shouldnt have launched it and they shouldnt, no matter how well DC could have sold, unless each DC owner were to purchase 10 games, Sega would not be able to get out of debt, then after out of debt they'd have to sell even more games to make a profit, DC had no business being launched by a company in debt
You are one of the most blinded fanboys I've ever seen. Sony didn't bribe anybody. It's just that everyone could see that the PS2 was going to sell faster. And they were right - worldwide PS2 sales were about 8 million for Jan.-March 2002.
Ok, Microsoft is an honest company too, so is AOL, these commpanies never use their money to bribe anyone, they never abuse their power.
Come back to reality man. These are big companies, do you honestly think they dont bribe people?
Except that Nintendo was still the most profitable video game company in the world during the N64 years. Whereas Sega experienced losses for three years straight.
Exactly, Nintendo knows how to run a business, Sega doesnt. Sega only knows how to lose money.
I'm not sure what you mean by these numbers, but every one of these consoles eventually sold far more than those amounts.
Eventually? My point was DC was the fastest selling consolee ever, I admit DC sales slowed during the end of the second year, this is when third parties dropped Sega and were dissing Sega at every chance they got, magazines and third parties which i believe had to be bribed, were claiming DC would fail for no real reason considering these third parties were selling sometimes millions of copies of their games.
Its simple, Sony is a bigger company, its not hard to understand, bigger companies influence magazines and third parties, through bribes, stock, politics, also remember, smaller companies like partnerships with bigger companies, such as squaresoft.
Last most third parties and even the magazines KNEW Sega didnt know a damn thing about business and thats the main reason why none of them had any faith in Sega.
Well it was the middle of the night and i was tired
lets go over what you just said.
You are wrong in every instance, except about the Saturn. All of these consoles have had 2-year runs with over 10 million sales, although not in every case was it the first 10 years.
Launch 1994
This is from a PSX biased site,
PlayStation launched in Europe; within six weeks the UK installed base had risen to 50 000. Around 350 000 units were in customer's homes across Europe by Christmas 1995. Price £299.
350,000 compared to Dreamcasts 5 million. Big diffrence.
May 1995
Japanese sales exceed 1 million units of hardware.
1 million the first year. Pathetic compared to dreamcasts 5 million.
January 1996
34 PlayStation titles have now been launched in Europe, 18 of them by third party licensees
Global sales of PlayStation hit 3.4 million units with 518 000 of those units sold through in Europe
3.4 million in Jan of 96.
3.4 million systems sold in the first year, commpare to dreamcasts 5 million.
August 1996
PlayStation game consoles cumulative production and shipment as at August 1996 reached 7.2 million units worldwide.
Japan 3.5 million
7.2 million units sold
PSX is selling good, but DC still had a faster start. DC was at 9 million systems when Sega killed it, and sold a million more soon later, reaching somewhere around 10 million systems.
The PSX reached 10 million systems
PlayStation Worldwide Shipments Hit 9 million units
during xmas 1996
IT launched in 94, so PSX and DC were at the same level, DC was set to domonate, lets not forget xmas of 96 is the same year the N64 launched,
PSX2 wasnt supposed to launch for another year when DC was killed of, Sega had the fastest selling system ever, the sales of PSX and DC leveled out after the first 2 years, PSX went on to sell about 12 million systems in feb 97, DC could have easily been successful with this many systems sold, Sega killed DC because Sega either didnt have a business plan and over produced (I really doubt Sega would over produce DC with all the PS2 hype) or Sega didnt have enough money,
I'm thinking Sega didnt have enough money, Sony got away with over producing the PSX, and they took a loss for a long time, but this is Sony.
Sony was taking a HUGE loss on PS2, once again this is Sony we are talking about.
See, this is why I called you hysterical earlier. AM2 did not spend a billion dollars on Shenmue. I've heard it was $70 million, which is still far too much, but you are off by an order of magnitude. Also, Okawa did not "break up the third parties," he split off Sega's development studios, which were first parties.
not hysterical, tired. It was late at night. The first parties were broken up, AM2 spent too much money on their games, period, and their games werent proven games like VF4 and Daytona. In the arcade industry AM2 could make their money back easily, this isnt true for the console industry. AM2s lack of business sense, and Segas lack of authority caused them to lose hundreds of millions from AM2s Shenmues.
Perhaps it's just sloppy wording on your part, but if you mean to say Sega didn't charge licensing fees, you're wrong. Part of the reason licensing revenues were relatively low was that developers kept jumping ship because they saw Dreamcast console sales were below expectations. 2000 and particularly 2001 was just a series of one cancelled game after another - adding insult to injury, some of these cancelled releases were Sega games. Anyway, this phenomenon explains why lower sales had a tendency to hurt Sega's finances, not help them. I still can't believe you hold the absurd position that lower hardware sales would have helped them.
Sega lost their third parties, mostly due to Sonys bribing, and Sega was in the situation Nintendo was in with N64, Sega however made too many games and wasted all their money, Sega could have had a successful system with DC easily if they didnt spend all their money up.
Thats my point, hardware sales being higher or lower wouldnt matter much, most of the money was lost on software development, low game sales, seganet, I mean having 10 million DC users is enough to make money, N64 made money with 10 million, PSX made money with 10 million, Genesis made money with 16 million.
Sega does not make MONEY for selling the DC, so Sega saying poor DC sales is their cause for failure sounds better to stockholders than Sega saying lack of a business plan is their cause for failure.
10 million DCs in 2 years? Come on, thats better than N64, better than PSX, better than Saturn, better than Genesis, better than SNES and better than NES sales, basically no system ever sold faster than DC at that point in time
The poor sales would have HELPED keep Sega alive due to Sega not losing so much money on system sales.
Tell me how Sega could lose more money by selling LESS than they would be selling more,
Its their lack of game sales which caused them to lose money. Their DCs sold great the first year, and good the second, they had around 8-9 million systems, more than all 4 years of saturn sales, more than 3 years of PSX sales and more than 3 years of N64 sales, Sega did this in 2 years.
This is good, at this rate they would have sold 20 million systems by now. Sega however couldnt afford to make 20 million systems.
Money is the key issue,
\\Mostly it is an unstructured series of vague or untrue claims ("When Sega launched DC they DIDNT have a business plan"). But there is a shadow of an argument in it. First you claim its failure was all Sony's fault. Then you point out that Sega has poor business sense. But then you blame its demise on the loss of Okawa, even though all he was doing was throwing good money after bad by largely continuing the pattern of mistakes, i.e., showing poor busienss sense. These three reasons can't all be true at the same time. Also, it doesn't help your arguments any that you can't seem to find the period key.//
Okawa was head of CSK, Okawa was dying of cancer, you cant blame him for poor business plan, he didnt even launch the DC. Okawa took over after he saw how much money Sega was losing, Okawa was also head of CSK Segas parent company and main shareholder.
Lack of business sense, Sony Monopoly and Hype, Lack of money after Okawa died.
Yes all 3 reasons, the DC shouldnt have even been launched, Sega was in debt when they launched it and had no way of even paying for the launch, Okawa stepped in because Sega was in debt and because of his pride, he saved Sega from going out of business when the DC first launched.
//Yes, much (most) of the PS2's early hype was terribly unjustified, and this had some role in hurting Dreamcast sales - but most of the blame rests squarely on Sega's shoulders. Their marketing was poor and they spent massive - even unprecedented - amounts of money on games that didn't sell very well. And they did exactly what so many gamers were betting they'd do: they abandoned their loyal customers yet again, just like they did with the 32X and the Saturn.\\
Exactly, Lack of business sense on Segas part, you dont make new innovative expensive games when you want massive sales, you do this after you are out of debt. Sega made games which didnt have proven track records, great games but unproven games.
Their marketing was great, they sold 10 million systems in 2 years, thats better than any system before it, and you claim DC had bad marketing?
Sega abandoning their customers is due to Segas lack of business sense.
You do not launch a product without a plan on how to make money on it.
Imagine Apple launching the imac series and then spending 2 billion dollars on OSX and selling OSX seperately.
Imagine Microsoft selling Windows in a store instead of packing it in.
Sega screwed up because Sega didnt know how to run a console business, I dont know who they fired after the success of the genesis, or perhaps that success was a complete fluke, but Sega was a very STUPID company in terms of business
You dont spend billions of dollars when you are in debt launching a system, Sega shouldnt have launched DC at all, they should have gotten themselves out of debt first. Imagine if you were chairman of Sega, you just stepped down after the success of the Genesis, and you allow a new guy to run the company, he launches 32x and Saturn and your company loses a billion dollars and your company goes into debt,
Now imagine this same guy decides to launch the DC while your company is STILL in debt and loses a billion more dollars. You are a billionare and you bail your company out, you fire the guy, but what can you do to save the company now? You can keep paying from out of your pocket until the company is making a profit as option number 1, option number 2, accept another half billion dollar loss and pull out entirely.
Oh and dont forget you need to launch Seganet.
Face it, Sega was fucked from before they launched DC, launching DC was Sega goingg out of business, but Sega was bailed out more than once by Okawa, Okawa eventually became too sick and died, the guy who destroyed Sega with the Saturn, 32x, and poor business practices took control again.
Why do i think Sega will go out of business now? not because their games suck, or even because their games are bad, but because the guys running Sega now that okawa is gone, have no business sense at all.
Okawa brought business sense back to Sega before he died, he broke up the third parties and made them all seperate companies so Sega itself couldnt go down because AM2 spent a billion dollars on Shenmue 3 which wont sell.
And Okawa had the idea to make a Sega PC graphics card, a PDA chip, and games for cellphones,
When Okawa died, all of Segas hardware plans died with him because it was HIS money that kept Sega alive on the hardware side of things.
Its really simple, businesses which dont make money fail no matter how good the product is, or how well it sells, Apple could sell a billion imacs, if they sell it at a loss, they lose money, its that simple.
Also lack of third party royalties kept Sega from making money on third party game sales, dont forget about that
Good question, conciousness would be the first time traveler.
You can imagine any possible future, or remember any possible past.
Dark moves faster than light, meaning invisible pockets in space
black holes, void, dark matter, gravity
literally he could instantly know all that is, was and ever will be, and control the whole uniiverse.
Sure he could travel into the future, even the past, but from what we know about physics and what this so called scientist should know, 2 versions of the same matter cannot occupy the same space.
This means if he travels into the future he'll be slipped into a mirror universe, just like creating a fork.
From what i know, time is change, we control change, and we control the future to some extent, but we control things as a mass conciousness,
we can use our conciousness to predict future events and remember past events, and this allows us to have some control over the future.
Someone who time travels, is essentially cheating, they cant effect our past or our future, instead by time traveling they create a seperate path for them, which is a mirror of our universe.
So i believe anyone who time travels will never return, they will vanish out of our exsistance and enter into another.
No one or aliens from the future can ever come to this universe because there are INFINITE parrallel universes, time traveling just creates a new onee.
Basically, anything that can happen, is happening,
anything imaginable, has happened and will happen, maybe not for a hundred trillion years in our universe, but eventually.
And in some universes its happening now.
Sure he could travel into the future, even the past, but from what we know about physics and what this so called scientist should know, 2 versions of the same matter cannot occupy the same space.
This means if he travels into the future he'll be slipped into a mirror universe, just like creating a fork.
From what i know, time is change, we control change, and we control the future to some extent, but we control things as a mass conciousness,
we can use our conciousness to predict future events and remember past events, and this allows us to have some control over the future.
Someone who time travels, is essentially cheating, they cant effect our past or our future, instead by time traveling they create a seperate path for them, which is a mirror of our universe.
So i believe anyone who time travels will never return, they will vanish out of our exsistance and enter into another.
Its a known fact based on super stringn theory, that there are other dimensions, up to 11 others, according to M theory, and string theory, and the newest theories in physics, Time travel if it is possible in terms of what we understand from physics, would create a fork in reality where the time traveler would go through the fork in the road and join the future, we'd continue on our own fork in the road and go to our future, this person who time traveled would simply be missing from our reality and placed into the other. It would be a transfer of matter from one reality to the next, like if you create a fork in a pipe and you send a ball through one of the forks, the ball can either split up and be in both forks at once (which i doubt) or the ball can go into one fork or the other.
If the ball goes in both forks at once then they'd be able to return back to our time and tell us what happened, if the ball leaves our reality, it can never return back.
When you go to the past, this is assuming time travel to the past is actually possible, it modifies the future, the future is no longer the same. You are now in a totally diffrent dimension, a diffrent reality, one which you created when you entered the time machine.
Time travel is something our minds do on a daily basis, you can imagine future events, sometimes you are right and sometimes you are wrong, traveling into the future allows you to travel into a POSSIBLE future, but no future is THE absolute future,
Time is not mapped, its dynamic, it works like this, everything that can happening, is happening if not in this reality in another.
Its more like sliders than likee the time machine movie, you travel through realities, or mirror universes, according to current theory, its believed theres infinite mirror worlds
A time machine actually isnt a time machine in that sense, its a machine which allows you to go into any reality you want, or create your own reality by modifying the past.
We all create our own reality anyway, the diffrence is with a time machine, YOU have an advantage, you can not only imagine a new reality but literally control the future by modifying the past.
Its like gambling but cheating.
A time machine allows you to essentially cheat.
The reason we dont see anyone coming from the future is, when you travel to the future, the past changes, you can never go back to the original past, if you do go back to the past its a new past thats a mirror of the original one.
I'm convinced anyone who will time travel into the future will never return, basically they'll vanish forever and all will vanish with them
Anyone who travels to the past will vanish forever from our reality
basically time travel is a one way trip.
If someone in this world time travels, they vanish FOREVER. They can never return to THIS reality,
You see, if they go to the past, it creates a new future, thus a new reality
If they go to the future, its the future but they cant return to the present after they get to the future because the present is no longer the same present, if they return, they'll return to a new present.
basically time travelers arent traveling in time, but traveling through diffrent realities, its more like sliders.
This is based on string theory, and the current ideas of dimensions, and understanding of the multiverse and physics